Joint Cordova and Vineyard Community Planning …...April 13, 2016 CPAC Workshop #2 35 • Transit...

Department of Transportation April 13, 2016

Joint Cordova and Vineyard

Community Planning Advisory Council

Workshops

Jackson Corridor Master Plans Workshop #2 – Transportation

• The General Plan Circulation Element

• The EIR Traffic Analysis

• Rural Roadways

• Transit Network and Service

• Trail Network

• Mitigation Strategy

CPAC Workshop #2 2

Agenda

April 13, 2016

• Sacramento County General Plan was Amended in 2011 • Guide for growth & development over the next 20 years • Composed of numerous Elements • Each Element includes Goals, Policies, & Implementation

measures

CPAC Workshop #2 3 April 13, 2016

The Circulation Element

• The Transportation Plan - Roadways – Defines the transportation network

and infrastructure to support the mobility needs of the existing and proposed land uses of the General Plan.

– Roadway and Transit Functional Classification

CPAC Workshop #2 4


April 13, 2016

• Transportation Policies – Mobility – Roadways – Transit – Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities – Transportation Systems Management – Rail Transportation – Air Transportation – Scenic Highways – Smart Growth Streets

• 79 Policies – Example Policy “CI-3 Travel modes shall be interconnected to form an integrated, coordinated and balanced multi-modal transportation system, planned and developed consistent with the land uses to be served.”

CPAC Workshop #2 5


April 13, 2016

Objectives

• Describes the traffic and circulation within the project area and the affected vicinity.

• Evaluates the impacts of the project on the transportation

network. • Provides recommendations for mitigation measures to reduce

or eliminate significant impacts as a result of the project.

CPAC Workshop #2 6

The EIR Traffic Analysis

April 13, 2016

The Study Area

• The study area encompasses the adjacent transportation network (roadways, intersections, freeways) that is likely to be impacted by the implementation of the project.

• The traffic consultant coordinates with County staff and other

potentially affected jurisdictions. • On large projects, the County will request an initial model run

to verify the limits of the study area.

CPAC Workshop #2 7


April 13, 2016

8

The Jackson Corridor Traffic Study

• The Study Area

– 261 Roadway segments – 164 Intersections

• Coordination with:

– Sacramento – Folsom – Rancho Cordova – Elk Grove – Caltrans – Connector JPA

April 13, 2016 CPAC Workshop #2

Project Trip Generation

• Trip generation is a function of the specific land uses

– Residential land uses (single family, multi-family) generate trips – Non-residential land uses (commercial, employment, schools) attracts

trips

• Trip generation resources

– Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual – Traffic simulation model

CPAC Workshop #2 9


April 13, 2016

Passenger Car Equivalents (PCE)

• PCE represents the number of passenger cars that are equivalent to a heavy truck

– Accounts for the operational characteristics and larger size of trucks – Generally a PCE of 3.0 is used (range is 2.0 – 5.0) – Large number of Heavy trucks may require wider travel lanes, larger

turning radius, and thicker roadway sections

CPAC Workshop #2 10


April 13, 2016

Project Trip Distribution

• Connecting trip origins to their destinations

– On small projects, existing travel patterns and local knowledge are useful in assigning trip distribution

– On large projects, a traffic simulation model will assign the trip distribution

CPAC Workshop #2 11


April 13, 2016

Trip Route Assignment

• A trip will generally be made on the route that takes the least amount of time

• Factors that can affect route assignment – Congestion – Directness of path – Physical geometry and environment (class of facility, adjacent uses) – Potential delay (stop signs, traffic signals)

CPAC Workshop #2 12


April 13, 2016

Level of Service (LOS) • LOS is a letter designation (A – F) that describes a range of

operating conditions on a roadway or at an intersection.

• Perceived impacts on speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, driving comfort, delay

• LOS A (free flow condition, no delay) • LOS F (heavy congestion, stop and go, extensive delay)

• Sacramento County utilizes a LOS E standard (Urban)

CPAC Workshop #2 13


April 13, 2016

Roadway Segment Impact • Roadway segment capacity based on

– Roadway characteristics (access control, shoulders) – Number of travel lanes

• LOS based on ADT (Average Daily Traffic) Volume – For a 2-lane Arterial with moderate access control LOS F represents an

ADT greater than 18,000 vehicles

CPAC Workshop #2 14


April 13, 2016

Intersections Impacts

• Methodology based on Highway Capacity Manual • Utilizes an “operational analysis” method • LOS is defined by total delay per vehicle in seconds • For Signalized intersections: Delay greater than 80 seconds

per vehicle is LOS F

• Stop Controlled Intersections: Delay greater than 50 seconds per vehicle is LOS F

CPAC Workshop #2 15


April 13, 2016

Other Impacts • Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities • Transit Facilities • Safety

– Adversely affect an existing or planned facility – Result in unsafe conditions

CPAC Workshop #2 16


April 13, 2016

Scenarios Studied under CEQA

• Existing Conditions – Existing Conditions (based on traffic counts) – Existing Conditions plus Project (E+P)

• Cumulative Conditions

– Cumulative Conditions – Cumulative Conditions plus Project (C+P)

• Project Alternatives • CEQA Alternatives

CPAC Workshop #2 17


April 13, 2016

• Existing – No Project • Existing – Plus Project • Existing – Plus Four Projects

• MTP Cumulative – No Project • MTP Cumulative – Plus Four Projects

• CEQA Cumulative – No Project • CEQA Cumulative – Plus Project • CEQA Cumulative – Plus Four Projects

• Project Alternatives • CEQA Alternatives

18

The Jackson Corridor Traffic Study

Impact [ Mitigation Measure





Standards of Significance

• An impact is significant if:

– A roadway or intersection is operating at an acceptable LOS and the addition of the project traffic degrades the LOS to unacceptable LOS

– A roadway or intersection is already operating at an unacceptable LOS and the addition of the project traffic increases the LOS by 0.05

CPAC Workshop #2 19


April 13, 2016

Mitigation Measures

• CEQA Guidelines §15126.4(a) requires lead agencies to consider feasible mitigation measures to avoid or substantially reduce a project's significant environmental impacts

– Widening roadways up to their General Plan Designation – Installing a new traffic signal or modifying an existing traffic signal

CPAC Workshop #2 20


April 13, 2016

Mitigation Measures in another Jurisdiction

• County Policy - Cross Jurisdictional Impacts shall be mitigated provided that a Reciprocal Funding Agreement is entered into with that Jurisdiction

– Sacramento County will mitigate impacts in another jurisdiction

provided that it is agreed that the other jurisdiction mitigates for their impacts in Sacramento County

CPAC Workshop #2 21


April 13, 2016

Smart Growth Principles

• Smart Growth advocates for compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices.

• Reduces dependence on the automobile for many trips • Reduces VMT • Improves air quality

CPAC Workshop #2 22


April 13, 2016

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

• VMT is the total vehicle miles driven within a timeframe and

geographic area. • VMT is typically expressed as VMT/household or VMT/capita • VMT is used when calculating Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas

impacts • The higher the VMT – the greater the impact on air quality

CPAC Workshop #2 23


April 13, 2016

• Amends the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to LOS for evaluating transportation impacts.

• New criteria will require a VMT based analysis. • Intent is to focus on GHG emissions rather than roadway

capacity. • Local jurisdictions can still condition land development

projects through the entitlement process to make roadway capacity improvements.

• Guidelines in development, likely will be in effect in 2017.

CPAC Workshop #2 24


Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg, 2013)

April 13, 2016

• The existing roadway network in the eastern portion of the County consists of rural roadways with narrow travel lanes and no shoulders

25

Rural Roadways

Image Courtesy of Google Maps


26

Rural Roadways

• The proposed urban development changes the functionality of these rural roadways and introduces:

– Increases in traffic volumes and speeds – Introduction of transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists – Increased conflicts between these varying travel modes – Greater roadway maintenance needs – Challenges for local residents


July 28, 2015

27

Rural Roadways

• Fourteen rural roadways affected by development in the Jackson Corridor – Douglas Rd – Eagles Nest Rd – Elder Creek Rd – Excelsior Rd – Florin Rd – Fruitridge Rd – Grant Line Rd – Happy Ln – Hedge Ave – Jackson Rd – Kiefer Blvd – Mather Blvd – Mayhew Rd – White Rock Rd


28

Rural Roadways

• Traditional practice: Widen roadway when traffic exceeds 2-lane roadway capacity of 18,000 ADT

• Proposed practice: Establish a 6,000 ADT threshold for improvement to County Standard 12-foot traffic lanes with 6-foot paved shoulders

– Threshold based on studies conducted by staff on Sacramento County

rural roadways and by national transportation associations. – Improvements would be phased to be widened in the future to

minimize throw away costs. – Staff would monitor use of widened rural roadways to minimize

secondary impacts to local residents.


29

Transit Network & Service

• General Plan policies for new development provide guidance to integrate land use and transportation to encourage alternative modes of travel.

• Existing transit service in the Jackson Corridor is very limited. • The Regional Transit’s Transit Action Plan proposes three

future Hi-Bus lines (contingent on additional funding):

– Jackson Road (west of Excelsior Rd) – South Watt Avenue – Florin Road (west of Bradshaw Rd)

• Even if implemented, would not meet the General Plan policy


30

• An iterative process to develop a transit network and service to connect the proposed land uses and provide connections to the Light Rail Transit (LRT) network.

• Participants included: – County staff – Regional Transit – Jackson Corridor project applicants – DKS Associates

• Separate transit networks developed to support each stand-alone project that when combined serve cohesively together.

• Service standard goal of 15-minute headways.



31



32



33

• Transit Performance - 2035 MTP plus four projects

– Rock Creek Parkway – 3,000 (daily boardings) – Jackson Express – 11, 531 – Kiefer Jackson – 4,991 – West Jackson shuttle – 1,489 21,400

• RT’s Route 51 bus line – 4,800 • RT’s LRT Gold Line – 21,800

• Work trip mode split – 4.1 %



34

• Cost to provide the transit service - 2035 MTP plus four projects – Capital costs $1,100,000 – Operational/Maintenance costs $8,500,000 $9,600,000 (per year) — Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE) 50,700

— Average annual cost per DUE $189 (per year)

• Costs could be reduced by:

― Charging a fee to ride ― Additional revenue from RT revenue sources and programs



35

• Transit performance and costs for various transit headways:

Headways Boardings Yearly Costs Reduction in

Boardings

15-minute 21,400 $9,600,000

30-minute 14,500 $4,800,000 32%

60-minute 10,500 $2,500,000 51%




Trail Network

39

Trail Network

• A community that includes a network of off-roadway trails for walking and bicycling encourages travel by an alternative mode and provides for health-oriented forms of travel and recreation

• County staff and the applicants developed an integrated trail network to link future residential communities with:

– Schools – Parks – Transit centers – Employment and Commercial areas

• Connectivity to existing and future regional trails


40

Trail Network


41

• Hierarchy of trail cross sections:

Regional Trail Conventional Trail Local Trail

Connectivity between projects and to other

Regional trails

Feeder trail network to Regional trails and

primary destinations within each project

Finer trail network connecting various land uses within each project

40-foot wide corridor 30-foot wide corridor 24-foot wide corridor

12-foot paved trail 10-foot paved trail 8-foot paved trail

2-foot DG shoulders 2-foot DG shoulders 2-foot DG shoulder

(one side only)

Trail Network


42

• Enhanced crossings of major roadways

• Two bridge crossings of the Folsom South Canal

• Inclusion of Regional Trails and major enhanced crossings and bridges in the finance plan – Spread costs for regional trails and facilities to all users – Allows for implementation for entire trail segments without gaps – Allows for implementation when needed by the community

Trail Network


Questions?


Trail Network

44

• Traditional practice: “You break it, you fix it”

– General Plan Level of Service (LOS) policy – Each individual project treated independently – A single vehicle can result in funding or not funding a major

improvement – No cost for using up existing roadway capacity – Unfair appropriation of funding obligation between multiple projects

• Proposed practice: “We break it, we fix it”

– Total transportation improvements needed to support proposed projects

– Each individual project responsible for funding their fair share based on their portion of the traffic

– Treats each project fairly

Mitigation Strategy


45

Mitigation Strategy

• Improvement costs may be offset by other funding sources and programs:

– SCTDF – Measure A Sales Tax – State & Federal funding programs – Cordova Hills SPA – North Vineyard SPA – Florin Vineyard Gap SPA – Cross Jurisdictional Impact fees

• Anticipates the sequencing of multiple projects approved over

time


46

• Goal: Roadway improvements implemented in a timely manner to support the growth in land uses

• Traditional practice: Roadway improvements triggered on the

number of residential dwelling units (DU)

– Sequence of implementation pre-determined – No flexibility to restructure – May not be responsive to where actual growth occurs

Mitigation Strategy


47

• Proposed

4 miles

Mitigation Strategy


48

• Proposed practice: Roadway improvements triggered based on a Dynamic Implementation Tool

– Sequence of implementation based on actual development – Very responsive to changing conditions – Efficient use of transportation funding – Allows for better management of transportation funds – Can anticipate the future needs for improvements – Tool can be updated to reflect changing conditions

Mitigation Strategy


Questions?


Joint Cordova and Vineyard Community Planning …...April 13, 2016 CPAC Workshop #2 35 • Transit...

Documents

Transcript of Joint Cordova and Vineyard Community Planning …...April 13, 2016 CPAC Workshop #2 35 • Transit...